In a recorded telephone conservation with Taylor that made its way to several media outlets last week, [Mayor] Bullard said, "I would much rather have - and I will say this to anybody's face - somebody who drank and drank too much taking care of my child than I had somebody whose lifestyle is questionable around children. ... I'm not going to let two women stand up there and hold hands and let my child be aware of it. And I'm not going to see them do it with two men neither."

The mayor has said [Police Chief] Moore's sexual orientation had nothing to do with her firing, but Taylor said he doesn't believe that.

People do know that we record things in this society, right?

But even if Bullard did fire Moore because of her sexual orientation, he'd legally be within his rights.

In 29 states, including South Carolina, it is legal for employers to fire workers based on their sexual orientation.

As a SC resident, I posted in our neighborhood group for Primary run-off day that voting in these small-turnout events is like a BOGO event for your votes... important seats can be determined by a margin of just a few hundred votes. 1100 votes separated the candidates in our county supervisor race, something that could have been swung by our neighborhood alone (let's just say the GOP nominee doesn't have much to worry about in the general election).

So whomever wanted to get Chief Moore back on the job and pants the mayor was pretty freaking savvy to get it on this run-off ballot.

factoryconnection:As a SC resident, I posted in our neighborhood group for Primary run-off day that voting in these small-turnout events is like a BOGO event for your votes... important seats can be determined by a margin of just a few hundred votes. 1100 votes separated the candidates in our county supervisor race, something that could have been swung by our neighborhood alone (let's just say the GOP nominee doesn't have much to worry about in the general election).

So whomever wanted to get Chief Moore back on the job and pants the mayor was pretty freaking savvy to get it on this run-off ballot.

It's the anti-Amendment One in NC, which passed during a heavily competed GOP primary.

In a recorded telephone conservation with Taylor that made its way to several media outlets last week, [Mayor] Bullard said, "I would much rather have - and I will say this to anybody's face - somebody who drank and drank too much taking care of my child than I had somebody whose lifestyle is questionable around children. ... I'm not going to let two women stand up there and hold hands and let my child be aware of it. And I'm not going to see them do it with two men neither."

The mayor has said [Police Chief] Moore's sexual orientation had nothing to do with her firing, but Taylor said he doesn't believe that.

People do know that we record things in this society, right?

But even if Bullard did fire Moore because of her sexual orientation, he'd legally be within his rights.

In 29 states, including South Carolina, it is legal for employers to fire workers based on their sexual orientation.

Who says gays need rights in this country?

Oh - haven't you heard? Gays already have rights. There's no need for people to challenge these isolated incidents. The Gay Rights cause is already won and gays need to STFU about it.

The last two days have been just dreadful for people who existentially fear the apocalyptic collapse of civilization. First this, then Indiana and the Tenth Circuit shove a bunch of same-sex couples' marriage certificates down people's throats?

Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor.

Benevolent Misanthrope:Oh - haven't you heard? Gays already have rights. There's no need for people to challenge these isolated incidents. The Gay Rights cause is already won and gays need to STFU about it.

/This is what some Farkers actually believe

My favorite is, "We were on the side of the gays the entire time, it's you libbie libs who are always bringing it up! Pfffft, we don't care what the gays do and the fact you libtards keep bringing it up is just more evidence you shouldn't hold any elected offices, since you don't care about the real issues!"

Latta Mayor Earl Bullard says he's hired Freddie Davis as the new police chief of Latta, after firing the previous chief, Crystal Moore, on April 15.The announcement about Davis' hiring comes one day after voters approved a referendum Tuesday to change the town's form of government giving council more power than the mayor.

Davis was hired one week before the referendum, around June 18, and the contract was signed on June 23, Bullard said.Bullard said he interviewed seven candidates for the position since Moore's termination.

Crystal Moore was very emotional as she told us today she feels as if she's been fired again.

"I have went from being a ecstatic, overwhelmed, not able to speak to crushed again. Once again the citizens came out and did what was necessary. He said he would do what the citizens wanted what. They came out and they spoke. They supported the yes vote," said Moore.She said she believes Bullard hired Davis to retaliate against the town for changing the form of government.

Bullard said he didn't hire Bullard for his own selfish reasons, but felt he was the most qualified for the position and that it was time for the town of Latta to move forward.

wxboy:Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor.

Jesus titty-farking Christ. What the hell is his problem with this lady?

Serious Black:wxboy: Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor.

Jesus titty-farking Christ. What the hell is his problem with this lady?

In a recorded telephone conservation with Taylor that made its way to several media outlets last week, [Mayor] Bullard said, "I would much rather have - and I will say this to anybody's face - somebody who drank and drank too much taking care of my child than I had somebody whose lifestyle is questionable around children. ... I'm not going to let two women stand up there and hold hands and let my child be aware of it. And I'm not going to see them do it with two men neither."

The mayor has said [Police Chief] Moore's sexual orientation had nothing to do with her firing, but Taylor said he doesn't believe that.

People do know that we record things in this society, right?

But even if Bullard did fire Moore because of her sexual orientation, he'd legally be within his rights.

There's a certain threshold most people cross when they get power that makes them believe the rules of society, even basic ones like , don't apply to them. The intelligence of the person generally has an inverse relationship to the level of power they reach before they begin to believe this.

Dinobot:Serious Black: wxboy: Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor.

Jesus titty-farking Christ. What the hell is his problem with this lady?

He hates lesbians. He made it clear before.

Yeah, I had heard about her getting fired and her being gay before now. I'm just baffled that he would go to such great lengths to get rid of a lesbian who had clearly shown that she was competent at her job. I really have no idea what the town should do now. Firing the new chief just because they want to rehire the old one would be pretty petty and would hurt him and his family after doing nothing wrong.

wxboy:Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor.

I think it will end up coming down to "We know you were just hired by our batshiat bigoted mayor, but I hope you understand that any decisions he has made become void after the referendum becomes official. Thank you for your time."

Weatherkiss:Benevolent Misanthrope:Oh - haven't you heard? Gays already have rights. There's no need for people to challenge these isolated incidents. The Gay Rights cause is already won and gays need to STFU about it.

/This is what some Farkers actually believe

My favorite is, "We were on the side of the gays the entire time, it's you libbie libs who are always bringing it up! Pfffft, we don't care what the gays do and the fact you libtards keep bringing it up is just more evidence you shouldn't hold any elected offices, since you don't care about the real issues!"

At least it's been awhile since I've seen anyone trying to claim that this is all about giving gays "special" rights.

wxboy:Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor.

Contracts are some death pact that can't be amended or cancelled.

The new chief will have a hell of a time in that position given these events, and should be strongly encouraged to resign given that he just can't seem to address the low morale issue under his short tenure.

This is kind of a demonstration of how bigotry works, and one of the main reasons why Democrats win in urban areas and Republicans win in rural areas.

People in rural areas and small towns usually never know anybody who isn't almost exactly like them. They don't personally know any gays/blacks/Mexicans/Jews/Muslims/whatever. So, such people are scary foreigners.

People in urban areas, by contrast, probably have at least one of each of the above living in the same building as they do.

But this woman wasn't a "scary outsider lesbian"; she'd been in the town forever. So, when she was forced out, they rebelled.

The two other reasons for this urban/rural Republican/Democratic divide are the size of government (people in urban areas "touch" government a lot (public transit for instance); people in rural areas, well, don't) and gun rights (guns in urban areas means drug dealers and gang bangers shooting up the place; guns in rural areas means a tool for hunting and protecting livestock from predators and for target shooting).

HotWingConspiracy:wxboy: Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor.

Contracts aren't some death pact that can't be amended or cancelled.

The new chief will have a hell of a time in that position given these events, and should be strongly encouraged to resign given that he just can't seem to address the low morale issue under his short tenure.

So can the new council remove the new police chief because 'reasons' (since they didn't agree to hire the guy, he pushed it through at the last moment) or do they actually have to have a valid reason to cancel his contract?

wxboy:Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor.

What are you trying to say, that a mayor who pulled a dick move to assert his manhood pulls yet another dick move in order to try and pull the rug out from under the council who tried to trump his last dick move...

Say it ain't so...

And if this guy who was hired doesn't know about the controversy, I'm sure someone can enlighten them about it... Besides, he doesn't really have the job until he takes the job, and, contract or no, you'd be surprised how fast a contract can be destroyed based on something mutually beneficial to all parties... He could accept it, then claim medical reasons as to why he won't be able to fill the position (allergic to assholes) or any number of other reasons... Doesn't mean he has to do this, just saying there could still be an out to this, besides the closet for the former chief...

ginandbacon:This story was so fascinating to me. I'm 47 and I honestly never expected this kind of progress in my lifetime. It's incredibly heartwarming and it's nice to be proven wrong in this way.

I'm so happy for the chief and for the residents of that town.

Nadie_AZ: Who says gays need rights in this country?

I wouldn't be surprised to see federal protection sometime in the near future. Maybe by 2020?

ENDA has already passed the US senate, Boehner of course refuses to bring it up in the house, so pretty much things like that are going to have to wait until we figure out how to end Gerrymandering once and for all so Reps have to again worry about that their constituents actually want.

Mein Fuhrer I Can Walk:wxboy: Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor.

I think it will end up coming down to "We know you were just hired by our batshiat bigoted mayor, but I hope you understand that any decisions he has made become void after the referendum becomes official. Thank you for your time."

If the contract was legally executed. It's going to be tough to nullify.

Stile4aly:Mein Fuhrer I Can Walk: wxboy: Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor.

I think it will end up coming down to "We know you were just hired by our batshiat bigoted mayor, but I hope you understand that any decisions he has made become void after the referendum becomes official. Thank you for your time."

If the contract was legally executed. It's going to be tough to nullify.

I think I just heard all the district court judges in that area wishing they had vacation time, cause this will probably be dropped in their laps.

wxboy:Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor

fark this guy in the earhole... and by that I mean, I hope someone takes him aside and educates him that being drunk is a bigger determent to the safety of his child then two independent women kissing.

Yeah, I had heard about her getting fired and her being gay before now. I'm just baffled that he would go to such great lengths to get rid of a lesbian who had clearly shown that she was competent at her job. I really have no idea what the town should do now. Firing the new chief just because they want to rehire the old one would be pretty petty and would hurt him and his family after doing nothing wrong.

The Town council should terminate the contract. He doesn't start until July 1. Don't forget that he had to have known that the town council was voting and, if they won, would reinstate the old chief.

He inserted himself into a situation that was in the works to correct someone else's wrongs, he can wait his turn to get his situation corrected.

Geotpf:This is kind of a demonstration of how bigotry works, and one of the main reasons why Democrats win in urban areas and Republicans win in rural areas.

People in rural areas and small towns usually never know anybody who isn't almost exactly like them. They don't personally know any gays/blacks/Mexicans/Jews/Muslims/whatever. So, such people are scary foreigners.

People in urban areas, by contrast, probably have at least one of each of the above living in the same building as they do.

But this woman wasn't a "scary outsider lesbian"; she'd been in the town forever. So, when she was forced out, they rebelled.

The two other reasons for this urban/rural Republican/Democratic divide are the size of government (people in urban areas "touch" government a lot (public transit for instance); people in rural areas, well, don't) and gun rights (guns in urban areas means drug dealers and gang bangers shooting up the place; guns in rural areas means a tool for hunting and protecting livestock from predators and for target shooting).

What the hell are you doing man? You don't bring reason, thought and empathy to an internet argument. If this place starts to civilize and treat people with dignity I'm holding you responsible.

zomega:So can the new council remove the new police chief because 'reasons' (since they didn't agree to hire the guy, he pushed it through at the last moment) or do they actually have to have a valid reason to cancel his contract?

I'm guessing the second. So, if he's willing to take the heat, they will have to find a valid reason to fire him, which could take months, possibly never if he does everything exactly by the book.

I think a likely scenario at this point is that the city pays the new police chief a large sum of cash, possibly his entire two year salary, to go away.

Mein Fuhrer I Can Walk:wxboy: Caveat: The police chief didn't automatically get her job back. Apparently the referendum was about transferring hire/fire authority to the council from the mayor, and apparently doesn't take effect immediately, since:

Mayor Bullard made another unilateral move Wednesday morning to foul up the council's plans: He announced the hiring of a new police chief on a two-year contract, starting July 1. The not-yet-strong council is now considering how it will fight the not-yet-weak mayor.

I think it will end up coming down to "We know you were just hired by our batshiat bigoted mayor, but I hope you understand that any decisions he has made become void after the referendum becomes official. Thank you for your time."

Check the contract to see if there's a "you have to bankrupt the town in order to buy me out" clause, with some kickback to our Friendly Homophobic Mayor.

Yeah, I had heard about her getting fired and her being gay before now. I'm just baffled that he would go to such great lengths to get rid of a lesbian who had clearly shown that she was competent at her job. I really have no idea what the town should do now. Firing the new chief just because they want to rehire the old one would be pretty petty and would hurt him and his family after doing nothing wrong.

The Town council should terminate the contract. He doesn't start until July 1. Don't forget that he had to have known that the town council was voting and, if they won, would reinstate the old chief.

He inserted himself into a situation that was in the works to correct someone else's wrongs, he can wait his turn to get his situation corrected.

There is probably a clause in the contract which will allow the town to terminate it, but not for free. There's almost certainly some sort of penalty attached to early termination of the contract. If such a clause isn't present, then the guy will undoubtedly sue for 2 years of wages.

Yeah, I had heard about her getting fired and her being gay before now. I'm just baffled that he would go to such great lengths to get rid of a lesbian who had clearly shown that she was competent at her job. I really have no idea what the town should do now. Firing the new chief just because they want to rehire the old one would be pretty petty and would hurt him and his family after doing nothing wrong.

The Town council should terminate the contract. He doesn't start until July 1. Don't forget that he had to have known that the town council was voting and, if they won, would reinstate the old chief.

He inserted himself into a situation that was in the works to correct someone else's wrongs, he can wait his turn to get his situation corrected.

If he was smart he would have placed a buy out clause in the contract. So all he does is go along with the Mayors BS and gets paid. If they don't buy him out he keeps the job. If they buy him out he gets the $$ and can go find another job. the only downside is you associate yourself with a jerk but $$ usually makes that ok

Arcturus72:And if this guy who was hired doesn't know about the controversy, I'm sure someone can enlighten them about it... Besides, he doesn't really have the job until he takes the job, and, contract or no, you'd be surprised how fast a contract can be destroyed based on something mutually beneficial to all parties... He could accept it, then claim medical reasons as to why he won't be able to fill the position (allergic to assholes) or any number of other reasons... Doesn't mean he has to do this, just saying there could still be an out to this, besides the closet for the former chief...

Unless he's already acted in reliance upon the executed employment contract (e.g. he resigned from his previous job and/or relocated to the area for his new job).